没有被讨论过的一道题：GWD5-Q30

白色鸢尾

感觉自己逻辑不算差，但这道题就是不太能想明白，而且也没有找到以前的讨论贴，按理说不是一道难题。

盼望牛牛们能耐心的给予解答，不胜感激！

Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

 

The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage.  However, it also lowers the nutritional value of many foods.  For example, irradiation destroys a significant percentage of whatever vitamin B1 a food may contain.  Proponents of irradiation point out that irradiation is no worse in this respect than cooking.  However, this fact is either beside the point, since much irradiated food is eaten raw, or else misleading, since _______.

 

A.      many of the proponents of irradiation are food distributors who gain from food’s having a longer shelf life

B.       it is clear that killing bacteria that may be present on food is not the only effect that irradiation has

C.      cooking is usually the final step in preparing food for consumption, whereas irradiation serves to ensure a longer shelf life for perishable foods

D.      certain kinds of cooking are, in fact, even more destructive of vitamin B1 than carefully controlled irradiation is

E.       for food that is both irradiated and cooked, the reduction of vitamin B1 associated with either process individually is compounded

正确答案是E

ashleyyuan

The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage.  However, it also lowers the nutritional value of many foods.  For example, irradiation destroys a significant percentage of whatever vitamin B1 a food may contain.  Proponents of irradiation point out that irradiation is no worse in this respect than cooking.  However, this fact is either beside the point, since much irradiated food is eaten raw, or else misleading, since _______.

A.many of the proponents of irradiation are food distributors who gain from food’s having a longer shelf life
B.it is clear that killing bacteria that may be present on food is not the only effect that irradiation has
C.cooking is usually the final step in preparing food for consumption, whereas irradiation serves to ensure a longer shelf life for perishable foods
D.certain kinds of cooking are, in fact, even more destructive of vitamin B1 than carefully controlled irradiation is
E.for food that is both irradiated and cooked, the reduction of vitamin B1 associated with either process individually is compounded

A錯在無關比較
B極端字眼，無關比較
C無關比較，拿烹煮食物作為final step跟照射X光 ensure a longer shelf life作比較。
D錯在違反題目前提：題目提到：食物照X光所流失的維生素並沒有比烹煮流失的多。選項卻告知某些烹調方式會比照X光的食物流失更多維生素

[此贴子已经被作者于2008-11-24 9:55:04编辑过]

白色鸢尾

谢谢咯！

ashleyyuan

我看不懂LZ問題的意思是什麼耶~
能不能解釋一下题库里没有的issue题目会考吗？！是啥意思?

won872

for food that is both irradiated and cooked, the reduction of vitamin B1 associated with either process individually is compounded

 

 

Proponents of irradiation argue that irradiation is cooking, since , no worse than cooking does, it destroys significant percentage of vitamin B1. It is the equivalency of vitamin B1 destroy process that draw the casual connection between irradiation and cooking

 

 

The author argue from a counter perspective--- this fact is either beside the point--- that irradiation is not an equivalent process to cooking--- because for food that is both irradiated and cooked, the compound reduction of vitamin B1 essentially means that food are cooked twice.

 

 

In common, food are either cooked or not, it cannot be cooked twice.

this fact is either beside the point: the fact --- "the Proponents of irradiation point out that irradiation is no worse in this respect---killing vitamin B1--- than cooking." is either beside the point, or say still not relavent in defining cooking. Becuase for food those are iradiated and cooed, the destroy of vitamin B1 is compounded. Obeviousely, the cook an only done once!

[此贴子已经被作者于2008-12-13 13:31:50编辑过]

白色鸢尾

额……

貌似是我操作失误了

那是我另外一篇帖子的题目

见笑咯

wellner

以下是引用won872在2008-12-9 7:56:00的发言：

for food that is both irradiated and cooked, the reduction of vitamin B1 associated with either process individually is compounded

Proponents of irradiation argue that irradiation is cooking, since , no worse than cooking does, it destroys significant percentage of vitamin B1. It is the equivalency of vitamin B1 destroy process that draw the casual connection between irradiation and cooking

The author argue from a counter perspective--- this fact is either beside the point--- that irradiation is not an equivalent process to cooking--- because for food that is both irradiated and cooked, the compound reduction of vitamin B1 essentially means that food are cooked twice.

In common, food are either cooked or not, it cannot be cooked twice.

请再解释一下“his fact is either beside the point”的意思。谢谢！

won872

this fact is either beside the point: the fact --- "the Proponents of irradiation point out that irradiation is no worse in this respect---killing vitamin B1--- than cooking." is either beside the point, or say still not relavent in defining cooking. Becuase for food those are iradiated and cooed, the destroy of vitamin B1 is compounded. Obeviousely, the cook an only done once!

Powellyao

ding

alisonkay

我觉得这道题目要根据题目里说的内容来理解. irradition的支持者的观点是, 即使irradition会令食物的维生素b1含量大幅下降, 这也不是很大的问题, 因为所有食物最后都要cook, 而cooking也一样会令维生素b含量下降, 这样看来不管有没有irradition, 最终食物的维生素b损失是一样的.而经过irradtion还可以增加食物的shelf life. 题目里反驳的观点是, 大部分经过irradition的食物都是生吃的, 而生吃的食物本来是不会流失维生素的,irraditon却使生食的维生素也流失了.而如果irradition的食物是煮熟吃的, 维生素的流失又会加倍.所以总的来说经过irradition的食物无论怎样流失的维生素都不会少于cook后的食物,因此proponent说irradition不会比cooking差是站不住脚的.